Rough night for Hurley

[Waquoit]

The coach's job is to maximize his players' strengths and minimize their weaknesses. That is all any coach can hope to do, but I do not think that is happening right now.

It's happening to a majority of the players on the team.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

I am much more a critic of Coach than most here. That said, I can't blame him for leaning on an experienced Backcourt to lead his team. This team will go where CV and Rique lead them (at least early on).

What I can't understand is his inability to call timeouts at proper times. He doesn't seem to recognize a negative run until he is deep under water. Then again, he will waste a timeout at a non-critical moment for reasons that baffle me. I think all that hype up emotion and the silly antics are a big distraction for him.

He is human so he is entitled to make a mistake here and there. But the inability to develop real-time sense and feel for a game is troubling.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

I think he needs to try to play faster whenever we can. IU is deep, so maybe he wanted to avoid it yesterday. But we are a bad half court team. I'm not sure I recall a UConn team since about 2006 that was a good half court offensive team.

The other thing is to take some risks. He came off a game where CV and AG had their best games, Carlton was a beast and Polley was very good. The bench did nothing. Fine, roll with that until it doesn't work. Yesterday, it was clear within moments of AG going out and CV playing PG, that that was not going work. And he left it that way, with no time outs or subs, until our lead was erased and had built a lead. Unacceptable. Play Gaffney. Play Adams. You cannot leave CV in at the point in that situation. I don't care if you don't trust young guards, you have to. You have no choice. On a similar note, Bouk needs to play with the better guys, not the subs all the time.

I thought 2014 was a good half-court team. By good I mean we had Bazz and Boat to bail us out time after time.

 

[BlueDogs]

You’re criticizing a guy because he couldn’t get URI to the Sweet 16? You realize that’s insane right?

Yes.

 

[NJHusky]

Hurley is really just starting down the path we already completed with JC. In the end, we won a lot -- but Calhoun/we lost a lot of big games along the way.

This has nothing to do with Indiana, obviously, but I think we have to accept that DH can't just pick up where JC left off. We're a part of DH's journey now, and hopefully it's going great places. But he has to figure out how bright the lights are and how to win big games. To do that, he's likely going to have to lose -- a lot.

A long way of saying -- you have to get Christian Laettnered before you get to the promised land...

IIR Calhoun won the NIT in his second season and was an NCAA number 1 seed in year 4. And that was starting with a LOT less history than Uconn has now. I'm not hammering Hurley, but implying it took Calhoun years to be successful is disingenuous.

 

[Waquoit]

IIR Calhoun won the NIT in his second season and was an NCAA number 1 seed in year 4.

What gets forgotten is that year after the NIT title was an absolute turd. They were supposed to compete for an NCAA spot and ended up losing at the Field House in the NIT. It was only when the senior leaders of the previous losing regime left did the program thrive. Hey, wait a minute...

 

[MilliniumPrince]

I know Jim Calhoun. Jim Calhoun is a friend of mine. Hurley is no Jim Calhoun.

But that is true of 98% of coaches.

 

[Excalibur]

What gets forgotten is that year after the NIT title was an absolute turd. They were supposed to compete for an NCAA spot and ended up losing at the Field House in the NIT. It was only when the senior leaders of the previous losing regime left did the program thrive. Hey, wait a minute...

That 88-89 team had three players that played on NBA rosters. Let's also not forget that both of those teams had a player that scored nearly 20,000 points in the NBA. There is nobody in the same zip code as a player on this team, at least not offensively. Right now there is only potential.

 

[BlueDogs]

The path to success is not going to be a straight line upwards. The mess KO created was huge. The team was nearly unwatchable and noncompetitive. The hole Hurley has dug us out of is impressive. We actually look and play like a competitive top 25- 35 basketball team.

Hurley has to do better in-game and the players need to keep making improvements. Expect frustration and failures (6-3 is the result of at least 2 self inflicted failures).

 

[Excalibur]

There is more to it than that. Moneyball has changed every sport, and I would argue it has changed basketball more than even baseball. Carmelo Anthony would still be a star player in the NBA if it hadn't. Modern coaches, even at the youth level, take a much more statistical driven approach to coaching than coaches used even 10 years ago.

Analytics dictates that all shots should occur at the 3 point line or at the hoop. Mid-range shots are bad, because they are lower percentage but earn the same number of points as a dunk or layup. While there is a little more debate on pull-up jumpers vs. catch-and-shoot, increasingly coaches are pushing players to shoot off the catch rather than the dribble.

I think Hardaway in Memphis takes analytics too far. I have only seen two Memphis games this season, but players were passing up open mid-range shots to take contested 3's.

There's a lot to digest here.

I don't think anyone is questioning what is a good shot vs. bad shot. The in-game selection of a shot is coaching only to the extent that it, like you say, can be punished by benching/lack of playing time. That requires options for replacement, which were lacking on Wednesday.

It's also interesting to note that the two most common criticism of Gilbert and Vital are over penetrating and taking too many 3's respectively (Gilbert also takes too many mid-range jump shots, but many of those are in late shot clock situations). If analytics determines that the best shots are layups, 3s and free throws (i.e. drawing a foul), in that order, what exactly is the issue here? Again, it's the selection of the shot in the heat of the moment.

Regarding catch and shoot vs. off the dribble, your analysis is out-dated. It's becoming increasingly common for threes to be taken off the dribble. A player that can only catch and shoot is too easy to defend (see Polley, Tyler).

 

[Waquoit]

That 88-89 team had three players that played on NBA rosters. Let's also not forget that both of those teams had a player that scored nearly 20,000 points in the NBA.

With all that talent, why did the season end by getting curb stomped at home by Alan Ogg? Bad coaching?

 

[ClifSpliffy]

That 88-89 team had three players that played on NBA rosters. Let's also not forget that both of those teams had a player that scored nearly 20,000 points in the NBA. There is nobody in the same zip code as a player on this team, at least not offensively. Right now there is only potential.

20,000 points in the nba? I bet that's top 50 all-time. c'mon, tell us who that is. the suspense is killing me...